I agree it's a problem. I think the problem is more with consumer
expectation than a design flaw. That motherboard was just one example. I
have built quite a few high end computers with > 4GB lately. In all cases I
have been able to run them at their rated RAM speed. The key is using all
matched RAM that meets the motherboard manufacturer's specs exactly and
using a decent motherboard. The motherboard doesn't have to be high end.
Most mid-range boards from the top tier manufacturers work fine. Where
people run into problems is using mismatched RAM and/or RAM that doesn't
meet the motherboard specs. When upgrading RAM it's no longer possible to
simply add more DIMMs. The old DIMMs need to be removed and all new RAM
installed, unless you can somehow find matching RAM for the old DIMMs. This
is almost impossible unless the RAM is purchased as a matched set. Even
purchasing RAM with the same model number from the same manufacturer can
result in mismatched RAM unless you are using very high end RAM. You also
need to make sure the PSU is up to the task of a) delivering enough power
and b) delivering stable power. A PSU that doesn't deliver stable power
across it's full range is the cause of many RAM errors.
All that said there are some low end motherboards and computers that just
don't work right with all the DIMM slots populated. The adage "You get what
you pay for" applies in spades to motherboards and computers in general. The
current quest by many for more RAM will be a source of problems for many
large OEM manufacturers. They skimp on power supplies and have the cheapest
motherboards possible. Start adding RAM and it's a recipe for trouble.
As I said I think it's more a problem with consumer expectation. You can't
expect a low cost consumer computer to work properly when you change it's
configuration. Low cost systems are commodity items that aren't designed to
be changed at all.
MS-MVP - Windows Desktop Experience: Systems Administration
"Colin Barnhorst" <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote in message
> It is still very much a general problem with consumer mobos, the vast
> majority of which do not support more than 8GB. Your mobo, of course, is
> no longer a current product, but I'm sure that the model that superceded
> yours would perform equally as well.
> The issues with DDR3 appear to be worse right now. The placement of the
> slots and southbridge must be an engineering nightmare at the increasing
> "Kerry Brown" <kerry@kdbNOSPAMsys-tems.c*a*m> wrote in message
>> "Colin Barnhorst" <email@example.com> wrote in message
>>> In addition to the other comments, you need to be aware that just
>>> because the mobo specs say that it supports 8GB of ram and that it
>>> supports 1066 ram does NOT mean that it will support 8GB of 1066 ram.
>>> It may only support 8GB of 800 or 667 ram but 4GB of 1066. It is all
>>> too frequent a problem with current mobos. It almost certainly won't
>>> work with stock settings. The best thing to do is get on the mobo mfg's
>>> user forum and start asking questions and reading threads. Also, look
>>> for the test reports on the mfg's website so you can see what
>>> configurations have been tested for each brand of ram.
>>> If you are going for a fully populated board with 2x1GB sticks, then you
>>> are not going to be able to do it at the top rated speed supported by
>>> the mobo. The current memory controller drivers and BIOS aren't cutting
>>> it on consumer mobos in that configuration.
>> Some motherboards do work properly. I agree that a lot don't, but to say
>> they all don't is an over generalization. I have a rock steady system
>> using a Gigabyte M61P-S3 motherboard using four 2GB DDR2 800 DIMMS (8GB,
>> fastest supported speed). The key seems to be to use high quality matched
>> RAM for all four sticks and use a motherboard/chipset that supports more
>> RAM than you are using. The M61P-S3 supports up to 16 GB.
>> Kerry Brown
>> MS-MVP - Windows Desktop Experience: Systems Administration